I'm not taking about you personally, i'm talking about the 280 million US citizens as a whole. I know not everyone is going to be put into jail and held indenfinetly, but is has happened to other people. Just because it doesn't happen to you personally, doesn't mean its not happening.

[quote:3bf2b]Keeping the law intact "will do great and irreparable harm" to the Constitution by allowing the government to investigate people's reading habits, search their homes without notice and pry into their personal lives, said Bob Barr, a former Republican congressman who is leading the coalition.

Mr. Barr voted for the law, known as the USA Patriot Act, in the House just weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks but has become one of its leading critics, a shift that reflects the growing unease among some conservative libertarians over the expansion of the government's powers in fighting terrorism.[/quote:3bf2b]

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/032305G.shtml

so did the CIA fly the planes into the building or was it the mossad?

[quote=rdeyes][quote=strvs][quote=rdeyes][quote=strvs][quote="rdeyes":eb29c][quote="ninty9":eb29c][quote="Coleman":eb29c][quote="ninty9":eb29c]Not suprising. I agree wholeheartedly that the Al Qaeda threat is overblown. Fear mongering is the name of the game.[/quote]that odd movie you sent me said there is no such thing as an "Al Qaeda". The Bush administration made it up according to the 'documentary'. I'm sorry, but that pissed me off and I deleted it. biggrin:[/quote]

Its not really that odd, it was produced by the BBC. And its not like he was just throwing the idea out there without facts, its part of a three part series that explains a lot. It goes over from 1945 right up to todays political climate. Anyway, not suprised you deleted it. Its a shame people can't look at things with an open mind though.

Our jobs as citizens is to question the government. If we all didn't care, then there'd be no "checks and balances". We elect these people. Their there to sure us. So I have no problem question politicians on the things they decide and do.[/quote]



if they send you orders to ship out to afghanistan are you going to question them?[/quote]
Why shouldn't he? If he is going to put his life on the line for his country, shouldnt he be completely sure of why? And that it is actually a perceivable threat?[/quote:eb29c]

can you turn down orders ?[/quote:eb29c]
[url="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/06/60II/main659336.shtml"]http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/ ... 9336.shtml[/url]

Apparently.[/quote:eb29c]

annoy:[/quote:eb29c]

Canada denies refugee status to US Iraq war deserter.. back to work traitor

I don't know. Why don't you ask them:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hijackers.html

[quote:0408b]Canada denies refugee status to US Iraq war deserter.. back to work traitor[/quote:0408b]

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/619/619p14.htm

[quote:9e138]If convicted, he faces up to seven years in prison.[/quote:9e138]

I guess they don't hang people for desertion anymore.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/619/619p14.htm[/quote:1ef05]

boo fucking woo ! do these people think that when they join the ARMED services its going to be a walk in the park .. enjoy hotel leavenworth

I think I'll use my own common sense over the thousands apon thousands of left articles.

sleeping:

As I re-read my post, it seems like I was fathering or lecturing you guys with the beginning points below, or sort of telling you that there’s something wrong with you since you’re conservative. Everyone has a different ideology. Reading it over I have realized that I probably didn’t word the following the best, but I don’t really want to change it since I wrote what I was really feeling at the time. I hope that everyone will take the time to read it. I don’t know how relevant it is to anything we’ve discussed, but I’ve typed it up now, so I may as well post it.

===========================

As I sit here typing it bothers me for some reason that some can't acknowledge another side of the story.

I was just like you guys up until a year ago. I was a conservative. I voted conservative in the Canadian Federal Election in the summer of 2004. The Conservative Party of Canada is the farthest right wing federal party in Canada.

http://www.conservative.ca/english/index.asp

You can see this from the front page where it says "defence of marriage". They are anti abortion, anti gay etc.

I started doing a lot of 9/11 research just out of my own interest. Actually, I think Mr. Buttocks sent me some links that I looked at and found interesting. And I wanted to know more.

I have always been interested in the political process, both Canadian and American. It is something I enjoy very much. Perhaps that is why I get a little passionate at times. If I have seemed crazy, or offended anyone in any way, I apologize. It can get heated in here.

My goal is to make people see another side of the story. I think that if I can get people to understand where I’m coming from and back it up with facts, maybe people will start caring about what’s going on around them instead of taking everything as normal in stride.

My political idealism has changed a lot in the past year. I come from a hardcore Conservative Christian background. My grandmother is an evangelical Christian who hates gays, rock music, corporate restrictions, and abortion among other things. My father is a Conservative based upon he wants to make the most money as possible. He hates the government taking away all they do. I don't think he’s concerned about the policies of a conservative party really, he said he would vote for bush if he lived in the states because my father is involved in the oil patch, and bush is good for the oil business.

When I go over to my grandmother’s house for dinner she brings out some new book she got telling her to hate Muslims or gays or whatever. Last time it was rock music. I read parts of the book at her house. It called Queen's "we will rock you" the "homosexual anthem" of the 20th century which is sung at many sporting events. The book is completely ridiculous. But she believes it with all her heart.

Se also believes in God with all her heart. So much so that she would sacrifice her children if god asked her to. What’s the point of me telling you this? I'm not sure. I guess it’s that my family is too far-gone to turn around. And what does it matter if I get a couple guys on an internet to read something different than they find on their local news channels? I don't know why it matters. But it does for some strange reason. I guess it’s the same reason that we all keep posting here.

I leave you with an article as always:

If this can't be taken seriously, I don't know what can. It’s from the BBC. The Telegraph but also ran the story, as well as The Independent but you need a subscription to view the Independent's article. These are three very credible news sources. If we can't believe these sources, then who can we believe?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 559151.stm
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/mid ... tory=94438
http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/ ... iden23.xml

If one accepts these sources, then the question becomes, why would the government label these men as terrorists, and if we believe this is not a mistake by the government, what else is the government not telling the truth about?

Or we can all just choose to accept that either the government, or the press and other people reporting on the story made a mistake and move on with our lives.

^^my basic argument in the past few threads summed up in one post ^^

[quote="TGB!":d4d0a]

Politicians using "fear" to stir up the masses - SAY IT ISNT SO! What a PROFOUND epiphany and critique on modern politics. I tell you what though - I've seen more pictures of terrorist than I have of "Old People" shopping for dog food because their SSI is so low. Truly "neo-cons" are the only sect of politikos using "fear" to their advantage.
[/quote:d4d0a]
I never said they were the only ones. Kerry/Bush are one in the same. It just so happens that Bush is the president at this time.
[quote:d4d0a]
As for Bush "giving" the name of Al Qaeda to AQ - absolute bullshit as any review of de-classed FBI/CIA documents show. I would think that the fact that Richard Clarke "chastising" Condi Rice about "AQ" before 9/11 would dissuade anyone of that particular ridiculous theory. . .or not, rarely has TRUTH been any deterrent to ideology.[/quote:d4d0a]
[quote:d4d0a]Although "al-Qaeda" is the name of the organization used in popular culture, the organization does not use the name to formally refer to itself. The name "al-Qaeda" was coined by the American Federal Government based on the name of a computer file of bin Laden's that listed the names of contacts he had made in Afghanistan, which talks about the organization as "the base" of the jihad.[/quote:d4d0a]
[url="http://www.answers.com/topic/al-qaeda"]http://www.answers.com/topic/al-qaeda[/url]

[quote:d4d0a]
As for the whole "civil liberties" bent: show me. I've YET to see any American arrested and held indefinitely for expressing their First Amendment rights. The PA SPECIFICALLY protects Americans in regards to their activities covered under the FA, and CONTRARY to popular belief actions taken under the authority of the PA ARE subject to judicial review AND propable cause - which this congressman would certainly be aware of if he read the silly thing. . .cest la vie[/quote:d4d0a]
http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpee ... 16879&c=86
http://ga1.org/nyclu/notice-description ... _id=926071
http://www.mcrcnet.org/Reports/2004/042 ... 2004.htm#1
http://www.socialistalternative.org/justice29/22.html

[quote="TGB!":d224e]

Third and Fourth Article - let them sue if they feel they were unlawfully detained. . .good luck though on a non-citizen and likely non-naturalized "citizen" taking this court. Were authorities overzealous in their canvassing - possibly. . .no arm of the justice department is immune to mistakes - again let em sue. Federal Courts and the Supreme courts have made their decisions regarding the PA, and the only "blow" has been two court cases - one dealing with the so-called Sneak and Peeks and the detaining of prisoners on "foreign" soil. . .hardly the indictment against the PA that the ACLU would like. [/quote:d224e]
So is this not an example of the Patriot Act?

It doesn't matter anyway. The fact still remains that thousands have been arrested under the patriot act, and only one has been charged with any form of terrorism. Even if no one was arrested Liberties are still being violated.

[quote:d224e]# (802) Allows law enforcement to conduct secret searches, perform roving wiretaps, and gain access to highly personal medical, financial, mental health, and student records.

# (206 and 507) Authorizes law enforcement officials to force librarians and booksellers to hand over book check-out and internet use records.

# (215) Allows FBI agents to investigate citizens for criminal activity without probable cause if they say it is for "intelligence purposes".

# (218) Allows law enforcement to search a person's home without anyone present and to delay notification indefinitely.[/quote:d224e]

Not to mention the definition of terrorism has been changed to:
[quote:d224e]SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;[/quote:d224e]

Under these provisions, homeland security has done the following:

[url="http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=206591"]http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=206591[/url]
http://www.parapolitics.info/phorum/rea ... =315&t=315
http://www.rense.com/general52/black.htm
http://www.kron.com/Global/story.asp?s=%20%201268949
http://grep.law.harvard.edu/article.pl? ... ode=thread
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stori ... 10819.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... DT0480.DTL
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030 ... -5163r.htm
http://www.unknownnews.net/030929dead.html
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0628-01.htm
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/ ... 18708.html


[quote:d224e]
And once again - you asserted - to bolster your AQ and Global Terrorism isnt REALLY that big of a problem ( rolleyes: ) - that Bush Co. gave AQ their name. . .which is not true and which your link does nothing to prove. Using your logic. . .since we named Italy, Germany, and Japan the "AXIS OF EVIL" - that whole WW2 thing was all in all a whole bunch of nothing. . .we "named" em for political gain. . .nothing to see here. . .move on Jews[/quote:d224e]
It wasn't to bolster an argument. Coleman brought it up. oOo:

And on the topic of congress:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0109-12.htm